The Sabres, Eichel, NHL and NHLPA had a meeting regarding Jack

[PromoTheRobot]

58 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's fine if you don't care about how it looks right now but you literally asked "why" it wasn't a good look right now and got the answer lol

I agree with you in full that winning cures all 

How it looks charges nothing for the Sabres. We are radioactive right now anyway. But how does Jack look to other GMs? Do they say "well it's the Sabres" and brush it off?

[Pimlach]

24 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Were any sea monsters present? 

Are we trading him to the Kraken?
 

😆 

[PromoTheRobot]

57 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I am honestly shocked by this fanbase’s loyalty to the very franchise they’ve watched ***** the bed for over a decade now. They don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt here. It requires big logical jumps to get to the point where you feel the team may be doing this right.

Luckily fan perception doesn’t matter because every other fanbase thinks the Sabres look absolutely ridiculous here. Problem is I don’t think for a second that sentiment isn’t also held in front offices around the league.

This very well could be a situation that makes players not want to be here (we already know many don’t) and other organizations not want to do business with us. The Bills being good has blinded Sabres fans into believing they’re only one or two right moves away from turning it all around suddenly but the fact is this isn’t football and there is no comparable to an elite QB that can turn this all around. This team is a dozen moves from being relevant and they can’t get any of them wrong.

This is about as bad a situation they could be in, even if the league and PA side with them.

Well I'm NOT shocked by the attitude that the Sabres are always wrong. It's like fans want this mess to get worse so they can keep harping on the team.

People complain KA is incompetent, but at the same time they panic over how things look and demand Adams "do anything" to move on from Eichel. These same people will then blame him for botching the Eichel trade, lol. The circle of life.

The Sabres have the upper hand. They have no incentive to do Jack or any other GM a favor. Like I said before, if other teams were so certain ADR surgery was the way to go they would make a deal for Jack and assume the risk. But oddly no one has. Instead we fans insist the Sabres guarantee Jack's contact, pay for his surgery, assume all the risk then trade him for pennies.

Edited August 29, 2021 by PromoTheRobot

[Dr. Who]

48 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Caving is not the right answer and neither is being so dug in that this cannot move on.  The Sabres cannot come off like career killers even if they are legally correct to do so.  
 

Every agent worth a darn is watching.  A good negotiation is when both sides feel they win.  
 

Always optimistic, the Sabres can transform into a good organization with the right leadership taking the correct steps.  This will take time.  I hope KA and DG can become the leaders that Beane and McDermott are.  
 

 

Right. Compromise needs to be focused on this result; don't really see how that happens, however.

[PromoTheRobot]

2 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

Right. Compromise needs to be focused on this result; don't really see how that happens, however.

The only appropriate compromise is retaining some of Jack's salary. I won't accept conditions based on Jack's condition post-ADR. The Sabres should not assume any risk tied to ADR surgery.

Edited August 29, 2021 by PromoTheRobot

[Thorny]

8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Well I'm NOT shocked by the attitude that the Sabres are always wrong. It's like fans want this mess to get worse so they can keep harping on the team.

People complain KA is incompetent, but at the same time they panic over how things look and demand Adams "do anything" to move on from Eichel. These same people will then blame him for botching the Eichel trade, lol. The circle of life.

The Sabres have the upper hand. They have no incentive to do Jack or any other GM a favor. Like I said before, if other teams were so certain ADR surgery was the way to go they would make a deal for Jack and assume the risk. But oddly no one has. Instead we fans insist the Sabres guarantee Jack's contact, pay for his surgery, assume all the risk then trade him for pennies.

Maybe on Twitter..

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Do we have any idea when this meeting took place?

I would say it would have to be at least a week ago and probably longer ago.  Time for Jackie Boy to hire a new agent and fire the old one (I still think that it's possible that jack was fired by his old agent).  Maybe that idiot tweet was right after this meeting, which was about 2 weeks ago, I think.

Assuming this meeting happened some days ago everyone is running a very tight ship, if this is the first time it has hit the Twitterverse.

[Brawndo]

9 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Do we have any idea when this meeting took place?

I would say it would have to be at least a week ago and probably longer ago.  Time for Jackie Boy to hire a new agent and fire the old one (I still think that it's possible that jack was fired by his old agent).  Maybe that idiot tweet was right after this meeting, which was about 2 weeks ago, I think.

Assuming this meeting happened some days ago everyone is running a very tight ship, if this is the first time it has hit the Twitterverse.

Wednesday the 18th per Friedman 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Just now, Brawndo said:

Wednesday the 18th per Friedman 

There you go.

[darksabre]

1 hour ago, Pimlach said:

It is reasonable to assume that something happened at the meeting that resulted in Eichel moving on from Fish.  That makes me think that the Sabres position was solid and well understood by the people there, including the NHLPA.  

The argument that I expect was put forth was that Jack might have better luck if he retained the services of an agent more widely respected by all the parties in that meeting. It's not fun for someone like Fish who is trying to run a player representation business, but I suppose no one gives too much of a damn about how he feels lol 

[Doohickie]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

This isn’t a great look for the team.

Not sure why.  They're one of four involved parties:  Jack, the PA, the team and the NHL.  Jack's agent got fired after the meeting.  How does this reflect badly on the team?  Sounds like, as Adams said, he's in control of the process.

2 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Sounds like the reason the agents got fired.  Sabres decide the surgery, Sabres hold the contract and the Sabres have the injury insurance policy that probably gets voided if Jack opts for the replacement surgery.  Jack has the NMC that kicks in next summer, and I guess the ability to collect his money on IR while damaging his career.  Sounds like we are going to be here for a while.

[Curt]

16 minutes ago, darksabre said:

The argument that I expect was put forth was that Jack might have better luck if he retained the services of an agent more widely respected by all the parties in that meeting. It's not fun for someone like Fish who is trying to run a player representation business, but I suppose no one gives too much of a damn about how he feels lol 

It would be pretty ballsy of someone to put that forth in a meeting with Fish sitting right there.

[Doohickie]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

I am honestly shocked by this fanbase’s loyalty to the very franchise they’ve watched ***** the bed for over a decade now. They don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt here. It requires big logical jumps to get to the point where you feel the team may be doing this right.

Not really:  We all know Jack isn't happy.  At this point it's a very legal risk mitigation situation.  No company is going to void insurance by allowing a surgery the insurance company doesn't approve.  I know it's been rumored Minnesota would allow the surgery but if we traded Jack there they would be in the same spot the Sabres are in.... do they take the gambit and allow the surgery, possibly being on the hook for the rest of Jack's contract?  The fact that Jack fired his agent tells me that the Sabres are in the right.

I wouldn't be surprised if the verdict is that the herniation is healing but it will take another six months or a year before Jack can play again.  Jack's frustrated with that, but the Sabres have to protect their asset.  If it means putting him on IR for a year, so be it.  If that's the case and he comes back to his 2019-20 form, it will have been worth the waiting.

There is no big logical jump.

[Doohickie]

1 hour ago, Archie Lee said:

To the bolded, I think you are connecting dots that don't align. Just about the worst thing a professional sports team can do is mess with a player's health.  In specific relation to Eichel's health, there is no reason to think that either side in this dispute is acting in bad faith. I understand that the reputation the Sabres have earned as a bumbling franchise will, for some people, be reinforced by this, but that does not mean their position is wrong.

Look at the option where he gets the disc replacement.  If it goes badly and he either never plays again, or it appears to go well but he suffers a disc failure down the road, and the Sabres allowed the surgery, the Sabres will be viewed as the team that messed with his health.  Not a good look.  I'd rather see them muddled in a player dispute that takes too long to resolve, but resolves eventually, than to see them risk Jack's health.  The disc replacement is deemed high risk.  From what I've read even the fusion thing carries a significant risk for NHLers.

We all know how obsessive Jack is with working out/getting ripped.  What if this herniation started out as a training injury when he was doing independent training apart from the team?  It could color why he tried to play through it last season; he didn't want to miss time because of his error.  If they laid all the cards out, maybe Fish spilled those beans (or the Sabres already knew), and perhaps he's already at risk of his contract getting voided.

1 hour ago, Thorny said:

Point being that doing the "right" thing in this case doesn't matter if the perception at large is that they are in the wrong.

I don't know why you think that is the perception.  I really don't.

[Doohickie]

1 hour ago, Dr. Who said:

Right. Compromise needs to be focused on this result; don't really see how that happens, however.

The problem is that any compromise that involves ADR is a huge risk for the Sabres.

[Doohickie]

41 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

Wednesday the 18th per Friedman 

25 minutes ago, Curt said:

It would be pretty ballsy of someone to put that forth in a meeting with Fish sitting right there.

It was probably obvious enough that everyone in the room knew it and it didn't need to be stated.

[Thorny]

15 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

I don't know why you think that is the perception.  I really don't.

I didn't say it was, I said, "if". My previous post:

2 hours ago, Thorny said:

Is this a situation we *want* to be in? Everyone has their side, apparently. But it’s quite clear to most neutral observers that who actually shoulders the “blame”, if there is any blame, is quite ambiguous. A messy situation like this, regardless of who we’d actually point to if we had all the information, doesn’t reflect well on the franchise. 

Plenty will spin it as the “adults keeping the kid in his place”, but even if that’s your personal stance, it would be willfully ignorant to think that’s the majority opinion: it’s all over the place 

Right. 

The situation overall is a poor spot to be in. If the Sabres play this perfectly, they have a chance to return to status quo re: the maximization of the Eichel asset. Unless one thinks Eichel was a net negative for the franchise, and I'm not one of those people, the Sabres aren't in a spot here where there is a lot of potential, if any, to gain from the proceedings. 

If the Sabres let Eichel sit for 5 years because they never get a good return, and never piss him away for a poor one, they don't come out well on the situational front, at all: they are the team they were minus whatever value Jack brought to the table. 

The Sabres are in the power position, yes, but only the power position re: a favourable resolution to this outcome relative to what Eichel wants. But a favourable resolution for Buffalo isn't a net positive, it merely gets them back to where we presumably thought they were before the Eichel drama. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by Thorny

[Doohickie]

What if... this is objectively a career ending injury?  Then none of this matters anyway.  I can think of several scenarios/timelines where he never plays ten more games in his life.

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

What if... this is objectively a career ending injury?  Then none of this matters anyway.  I can think of several scenarios/timelines where he never plays ten more games in his life.

Then it's a disastrous result for Buffalo. This is the point I am making

Unless they fleece another team into paying full value, I guess

[GASabresIUFAN]

34 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

What if... this is objectively a career ending injury?  Then none of this matters anyway.  I can think of several scenarios/timelines where he never plays ten more games in his life.

I haven't heard that term being floated.  I’ve heard he might not be the same player after either surgery but not career ending.  Since TM isn’t a GM anymore, hard for teams to trade damaged goods for big returns.

Edited August 29, 2021 by GASabresIUFAN

[PromoTheRobot]

43 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

What if... this is objectively a career ending injury?  Then none of this matters anyway.  I can think of several scenarios/timelines where he never plays ten more games in his life.

 

39 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Then it's a disastrous result for Buffalo. This is the point I am making

Unless they fleece another team into paying full value, I guess

 

All the more reason not to budge on ADR surgery if that voids the Sabres contact insurance.

[Doohickie]

32 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

I haven't heard that term being floated.  I’ve heard he might not be the same player after either surgery but not career ending. 

It's clearly a possibility.  Three scenarios:

1. He never has surgery but the herniation doesn't heal and he isn't cleared to play.
2. He has fusion surgery and it turns out like Derek Dorsett and he injures an adjacent disc and has to retire.
3. He has the disc replacement surgery and the risk we're all talking about rears its head... not sure what that would look like but in the extreme could it mean paralyzed Jack?

Each course of action could mean Jack's career is over.  The surgery options could get him back on the ice sooner, but once you perform surgery you can't unperform it so I get why they team prefers a wait and see approach.

It's in no one's best interest to float that term- not Jack's, not the team's.  No one is going to mention that elephant in the room.

[Marvin]

3 hours ago, Hoss said:

I am honestly shocked by this fanbase’s loyalty to the very franchise they’ve watched ***** the bed for over a decade now. They don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt here. It requires big logical jumps to get to the point where you feel the team may be doing this right.

Luckily fan perception doesn’t matter because every other fanbase thinks the Sabres look absolutely ridiculous here. Problem is I don’t think for a second that sentiment isn’t also held in front offices around the league.

This very well could be a situation that makes players not want to be here (we already know many don’t) and other organizations not want to do business with us. The Bills being good has blinded Sabres fans into believing they’re only one or two right moves away from turning it all around suddenly but the fact is this isn’t football and there is no comparable to an elite QB that can turn this all around. This team is a dozen moves from being relevant and they can’t get any of them wrong.

This is about as bad a situation they could be in, even if the league and PA side with them.

I really, really resent the first paragraph.  My logic to supporting the franchise on how they are handling Eichel is crystal clear and provable from my point of view.  Proof below.

I don't care that every other fan base is piling on; they want the Sabres to be bad and look bad, so their opinions are immaterial.

I don't care what the media think.  They get their juiciest information from players who don't want to be here and teams which want the Sabres to be bad.  The dice are already showing snake eyes from them.

I also don't care what players' perceptions are because the analyses mooted for them are too short-term in view.  Moreover, most already don't want to be here, so the situation will not get significantly worse.  And they have a LOT to gain from either the Sabres caving or a legal decision in Eichel's favour.

Not to mention that is a potentially precedent-setting situation which is mind-manglingly complex and every side has solid arguments for their point of view.  No resolution is likely to be easy.

From my contacts in the hockey media and my brother's friends in some NHL front offices, I am well aware of the perception of the Sabres.  Among most players and media, it is worse than *you* think it is.  Amongst upper management and the owners, their appears to be grudging support for the Sabres --somtimes only because of the ramifications of the Sabres caving in to Eichel or a legally binding resolution which has Eichel get his way with the Sabres on the hook.

There was NO way the Sabres could have come up looking OK to players once GMs gave their offers because the resolution was either going to be a ROR-level trade or it was going to drag out like it is.  It was straight-up lose-lose.  Therefore, IMHO, the primary concerns had to be:

Premise 1. The Sabres should do only what their doctors and medical professionals think is the most prudent course of action.

Premise 2. The Sabres should not permit any medical procedure not covered by insurance.

Premise 3. GMKA should not trade Eichel if all the offers he is getting are the crap rumoured.  He needs to not be a patsy for the other GMs and to do the best he can to get a fair return for Eichel.

Thus...

Claim: the Sabres should deny Eichel the surgery he wants and not trade him until the offers are passable.

Proof: The medical staff can not find evidence, let alone proof, that the surgery Eichel wants is effective, safe, and durable enough to withstand sticks to the neck, violent checks, elbows to the head, etc.  By premise 1, the Sabres should go with the medical procedures which are acceptable to the team's medical staff.  We also know that several third parties consulted by Eichel himself agreed with the Sabres.

Because of the lack of evidence for the safety and efficacy of the surgery Eichel wants, the consensus of the medical staff and a majority of third parties consulted, and that the surgery has not been done, we may infer that insurance will not cover anyone for said procedure.  By premise 2, the Sabres should not allow the procedure.

The only offers for Eichel which other franchise's leaked out in the media for Eichel have been somewhere between risible and insulting.  We also have been told GMKA's asking price.  The two ends are not even close.  By premise 3, GMKA should not have traded Eichel yet.

Hence, the current Sabres actions so far are correct from my point of view and they deserve my whole-hearted support.  QED

[triumph_communes]

I speculate Fish was trying to tank his value to force Sabres to offload him to a team that would allow for the preferred surgery. Sabres never wavered and Jack switches to the agent that pulled off the Duchene deal. Colorado has done well for itself after getting rid of ROR and Duchene - it’s not the end of the world. 

[Norcal]

No offers have been accepted and this story keeps growing. The more time goes on the more I'm wondering....

What if they just put him on ice for a year and let him heal up (LTIR) then bring him back with a seasoned young core and new draft additions next season. 

The Lightning sat their star all season and brought him back for the playoffs. There are plenty of opinions on whether that should be allowed but the rules say it is. 

This is assuming rest will heal Jack. Has there been an update on that?  If surgery is needed I'd take the same approach and trading him would definitely be off the table at that point anyways.